Despite initial comments in support of HTML5 as an option standard, Adobe has taken action to sabotage the open specification in an effort to support its existing position with Flash.

Update: Adobe's Larry Masinter has issued a correction that insists neither he nor his company is intentionally holding up the HTML5 spec:

"No part of HTML5 is, or was ever, 'blocked in the W3C HTML Working Group -- not HTML5, not Canvas 2D Graphics, not Microdata, not Video not by me, not by Adobe."

Neither Adobe nor I oppose, are fighting, are trying to stop, slow down, hinder, oppose, or harm HTML5, Canvas 2D Graphics, Microdata, video in HTML, or any of the other significant features in HTML5."

Masinter also added, "There are some things that are wrong with the spec I'd like to see fixed. There are some things that are really, really, wrong with the process that I'd like to improve."

Ian Hickson, a member of the HTML5 working group and an employee of Google, originally reported this week that "the latest publication of HTML5 is now blocked by Adobe, via an objection that has still not been made public (despite yesterday's promise to make it so)."

Hickson contrasted a series of comments from Adobe executives, including CEO Shantanu Narayen, who in 2009 said, "To the extent that an improved HTML standard accelerates innovation and consistent reach for web content, were very supportive."

Dave McAllister, an Adobe Evangelist, said last year that, "for Adobe, 'open' is all aspects of communications and technologies. For us, those are open source, standards, and community. [...] We make sure that we talk to our communities, that we play with the standards groups, [...] We are actually one of the most open companies that are active."

Earlier this month, Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch said that Adobe supports HTML and its evolution.

Despite all these supportive public comments however, Adobe was seen to be working to block the HTML5 specification, particularly in the realm of the canvas element. While HTML5 is often contrasted with Flash as a means for supporting video playback, the new HTML5 canvas element presents a direct threat to Flash as a way to add animation or navigation elements to a webpage.

The HTML5 canvas element also supports the creation of web games, advertisements, and other interactive content, a feature set that will make its adoption a direct threat to Adobe's Flash platform.

Adobe has been working to incite interest and talk about Flash, particularly on the iPhone, iPod touch and the new iPad, none of which support Flash.

The problem is not Adobe, but the process. No one company should be able to block a standards adoption like this unless the process itself is flawed enough to allow it. Fix the process, don't denounce Adobe (morally in the wrong as they may be) by using the rules to their advantage.

I didn't think this would have been a story or I would have submitted it a couple days ago. Anyway, I think Canvas as a real threat is a ways off. There would need to be a proper development tool that is as easy as Flash, which will take awhile, but Adobe should be scared of this impending threat. They've already lost video streaming to HTML5; it's all down hill for Adobe on that front.

One thing to note is that Canvas can be very processor intensive, just like Flash. At think point Flash is a much better alternative but I'm certain that won't be the case in a couple years.

so they're morally wrong but we shouldn't denounce them? What? Why don't I understand? Oh! Because that doesn't make sense.

It does if you think (ie. use your brain). FIX THE PROCESS. Stop Adobe from being able to do this! It's not as if asking them to stop is going to work, so remove their ability to do so (which never should have existed in the first place.) Duh?

Adobe..."Run to the Hills". Flash is dying which is Adobe's fault. Have you ever tried to solve something thru customer service? Horrible!!! Macromedia was a much better company. To put all of your eggs in one basket ( Flash ) in todays tech world is suicide.

It does if you think (ie. use your brain). FIX THE PROCESS. Stop Adobe from being able to do this! It's not as if asking them to stop is going to work, so remove their ability to do so (which never should have existed in the first place.) Duh?

Yeah, but that's like arguing if there were some legal loophole that allowed people to steal from or even kill other people, it would be wrong for us to complian about/condemn the people taking advantage of that loophole. they're two different issues, and one doesn't preclude the other.

So of course, we should lobby for improvements in the process. I have no problem with that.

And of course a company might put its own self-interest ahead of the general good. Corporations aren't eligible for sainthood.

It's not unlike the major powers that have veto rights in the UN, is it!

Spare me the common Democratic mantra of stealing from Peter to pay Paul.

Why don't we just spare everyone any and all political commentary.

Quote:

This is just the have-nots trying to grab from the haves without having to do any work themselves.

¿Que? HTML5 WGC is the "have notes" trying to grab from Abode without doing any work themselves? Are you not aware of the amount of time and effort that HTML5 will take from many corporations and individuals?

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I am Apple. I have two cows. I give one to my neighbor, because I can.

I am Adobe. I have two cows. My neighbor has none. So?

I am Microsoft. I have two cows. I make a boatload of money selling really crappy software, but it somehow becomes the standard for corporate America. I want to help my starving neighbors, so I keep my two cows, but donate the bulk of my assets to "do good things" in faraway lands. My CPA loves me because I can write off the bulk of this, which in reality lets me keep more of my profits which lets me buy even more cows. But, I still don't give any cows to my neighbors.

There. That should do it. Now everyone will have something or some position they can be angry about. My work here is done.

Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.

Develop something better than Flash. It's old and outdated and should have been done away a long time ago. Adobe has the money and the talent to do better.

Where do they make their money with Flash? They dropped the licensing fees and usage restrictions for Flash and the runtime back in 2008. It seems to me they would be served best by making Flash CS the best app for creating HTML5-based sites with a built in fallback compiler for older browsers. I'd think this would make Adobe a lot of money while giving Flash an anchor for the inevitable lack of HTML5 in older browsers and sites that want to support video codecs your browser doesn't.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Unless they plan on writing that pile of crap from scratch, they may have a chance. But I think they sat on their asses too long and now it's too late. HTML is easier to program for and with Flash you practically have to have a degree to use it, like most other Adobe products.

I didn't think this would have been a story or I would have submitted it a couple days ago. Anyway, I think Canvas as a real threat is a ways off. There would need to be a proper development tool that is as easy as Flash, which will take awhile, but Adobe should be scared of this impending threat. They've already lost video streaming to HTML5; it's all down hill for Adobe on that front.

Adobe could've been interested in developing that tool and this is probably where they will end up anyways. Not that it can really save them though

It'll take a few years but Flash as a proprietary 'standard' is over. Adobe realise that iPhone/iPad platform will have enough mindshare for everyone to want their site to be compatible. Its happening already. If they want Flash to retain dominion they need to open-source that fucker right now and concentrate on making the Flash editor a first class application. Unfortunately that would expose the appalling code mess that I suspect it is.

Adobe will attempt to engineer Flash to compile into HTML/Javascript for web and iPhone/iPad apps (Flash CS5 will 'Publish to iPhone' apparently). Its possible that the Adobe objections are about ensuring that they can do that. The problem that I can see is that the engineering effort required by Adobe might not make economic sense.

I am Apple. I have two cows. I give one to my neighbor, because I can.

I am Adobe. I have two cows. My neighbor has none. So?

I am Microsoft. I have two cows. I make a boatload of money selling really crappy software, but it somehow becomes the standard for corporate America. I want to help my starving neighbors, so I keep my two cows, but donate the bulk of my assets to "do good things" in faraway lands. My CPA loves me because I can write off the bulk of this, which in reality lets me keep more of my profits which lets me buy even more cows. But, I still don't give any cows to my neighbors.

There. That should do it. Now everyone will have something or some position they can be angry about. My work here is done.

Shouldn't Apple say something like "I am Apple. I have two cows. I sell them both to the neighbour with 60% margin and purchase 4 new ones from breeder in China"..?

No, honestly - isn't every corporation trying to protect what brings them money? Isn't Apple doing the same by preventing iDevices to sync with alternative media managers? Or by preventing people to run OSX on alternative (yet compatible) hardware?

We don't even know the reason for Adobe's objection. What if it is violation of Adobe's patents? Anyone really expects they should play Mother Teresa and let it be?

I'm a member of the HTML WG, but I'm not speaking for the HTML WG, or W3C. I'm only expressing my opinion, and what I know to be facts. I'm also not an employee of Google, Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, or any other company (I'm a writer, for O'Reilly).

There is no truth to this rumor. The posting here is inaccurate. Grossly inaccurate I would add.

This was an issue that has been under discussion, off and on, on the publicly accessible HTML WG for months. It has to do with scope and charter, not the specifications themselves. The Adobe representative to the HTML WG registered his concerns about the fact that the HTML WG is working on specifications that push, or exceed the group's charter. This includes Microdata, RDFa-in-HTML, and the 2D Canvas API.

Adobe is not blocking any specification. There are dozens of issues that are "blocking" HTML5, if you want to use that term, of which I'm responsible for many at this time. Technically the HTML5 specification can't advance to Last Call status until these issues are resolved. However, the W3C management can override my issues, and the issues of any individual or company. No one company can block the advancement of any specification without the concurrence of the W3C leadership.

All of these issues are based on improving all of the specifications, including HTML5 and Canvas. it's unfortunate that the HTML5 editor, who is also the Google representative to the HTML WG introduced such wild, and unfounded speculation, causing harm not only to the Adobe representative, but distracting all of us from the work of finishing the HTML5 and other specifications.

I would hope that people would seek to get confirmation before posting unfounded accusations.

Say it isn't so Adobe! It's so a tragedy that a company I want to succeed because of their great products is resorting to sabotage HTML5. If this is what you want Adobe then is no more of my money for you.

All of these issues are based on improving all of the specifications, including HTML5 and Canvas. it's unfortunate that the HTML5 editor, who is also the Google representative to the HTML WG introduced such wild, and unfounded speculation, causing harm not only to the Adobe representative, but distracting all of us from the work of finishing the HTML5 and other specifications.

To be fair, Hixie never specified Canvas in his blog.

Quote:

Next time I would ask that you all, please, withhold judgment until you actually have facts, rather than innuendo.

Not making emotion-filled rants based on little to no data is not what the internet is about. Welcome to the forum and thank you for voicing your PoV on this matter. I'm sure it's far from over.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I'm a member of the HTML WG, but I'm not speaking for the HTML WG, or W3C. I'm only expressing my opinion, and what I know to be facts. I'm also not an employee of Google, Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, or any other company (I'm a writer, for O'Reilly).

There is no truth to this rumor. The posting here is inaccurate. Grossly inaccurate I would add.

This was an issue that has been under discussion, off and on, on the publicly accessible HTML WG for months. It has to do with scope and charter, not the specifications themselves. The Adobe representative to the HTML WG registered his concerns about the fact that the HTML WG is working on specifications that push, or exceed the group's charter. This includes Microdata, RDFa-in-HTML, and the 2D Canvas API.

Adobe is not blocking any specification. There are dozens of issues that are "blocking" HTML5, if you want to use that term, of which I'm responsible for many at this time. Technically the HTML5 specification can't advance to Last Call status until these issues are resolved. However, the W3C management can override my issues, and the issues of any individual or company. No one company can block the advancement of any specification without the concurrence of the W3C leadership.

All of these issues are based on improving all of the specifications, including HTML5 and Canvas. it's unfortunate that the HTML5 editor, who is also the Google representative to the HTML WG introduced such wild, and unfounded speculation, causing harm not only to the Adobe representative, but distracting all of us from the work of finishing the HTML5 and other specifications.

I would hope that people would seek to get confirmation before posting unfounded accusations.

Next time I would ask that you all, please, withhold judgment until you actually have facts, rather than innuendo.

Thank you very much.

Though I am around here for more than 18 months, I still get surprised how quickly some people get into defensive stance when they think someone might be trying to jeopardise beloved SJ's visions of the future.